Saturday, July 26, 2014

I tossed out a short bit recently on Facebook and Twitter about how I was pretty sure Anthony Summers' upcoming book Looking for Madeleine due out in September would be a very pro-McCann book and I heard back from some that they held out hope that the book would bring out the facts and not be another whitewash of the evidence. I didn't explain in depth exactly why I thought this book was going to be one more nail in the coffin in the fight for truth and justice - for Madeleine McCann, Gonçalo Amaral, and everyone who has stuck their neck out - why I thought that this was yet another sign of the end days for this sad case which I predict will have Scotland Yard not far behind with their own final whitewash.

Here is why I profiled Mr. Summers and his book (co-authored with his wife, Robbyn Swan) as a pro-McCann piece of propaganda and not at all a well-researched and even-handed book on the case.

1) Mr. Summers emailed me for permission to use some quotes from my blogs in his book. The quotes were the kind that could easily be used out of context to show me as a conspiracy nut.

2) If Mr. Summers was truly doing in-depth research on the case and "in-depth interviews" as is claimed in this Amazon blurb, why did he never do an in-depth interview with me? I am not trying to say I am vastly important and how dare he ignore me, but I would think any author worth their salt would interview a well-known profiler who has written numerous blogs on the case, who has written a book that was Carter-rucked by the McCanns, and who has actually gone to Portugal to "look for Madeleine." But, no, he only emailed me just before the final copy went to print to ask me about a few quotes.

3) He interviewed some McCanns (not sure which ones).

4) He didn't interview Gonçalo Amaral.

5) He got a big publisher and his book is being published in the UK. If that isn't enough of a red flag, you are bloody well blind! Read: No fear of being Carter-Rucked!

6) What interesting timing......

Anyway, I asked Mr. Summers a few questions and he refused to give me a straight answer. I had the sickening feeling my suspicions were going to be well-founded.

And today I read the description of the book at Amazon.co. uk. There was the proof I profiled him and his book correctly.

Speculation that the McCanns played a role in their daughter's fate, the authors demonstrate, is unfounded.

Sadly, I think this book is going to get a lot of positive media attention. The man and his wife can write and their skill is going to convince people who read the book that the McCanns are innocent and an abduction actually happened. He is touting the party line and the McCanns will surely back the book as, finally, they have "award-winning authors Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan" producing "the first independent, objective account of the case."
My foot.

What
really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann in Praia da Luz, Portugal in
2007? Was she abducted as the Gerry and Kate have claimed or did
something happen to Madeleine on May 3 in the vacation apartment and the
incident covered up? Criminal Profiler Pat Brown analyzes the evidence
and takes the readers through the steps of profiling, developing a
theory that is intriguing and controversial.

74 comments:

Anonymous
said...

Yes , as you predicted and as I expected, Pat. This case is truly astounding. Whatever it is that is being covered up it is amazing that the fund charade has been allowed to continue for so long. The tragit case of child in Edinburgh highlights that the inconsistencies in the mother's statements led police to expose her guilt. Inconsistencies is yet? Isn't that what the McCanns and friends' statements abound in? Yes this whitewash and cover up may not be exposed in our lifetime, but we have the knowledge, because THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF ABDUCTION, that the McCanns will live to the end of their days with their knowledge of what actually happened, and the consequences of the effects of all of this on the two children who remain with them. Yes, this book will receive huge media coverage, and a huge backlash on social media, but what actually did happen, remains what happened. k

In the long run, it isn't really about the McCanns or justice for Maddie; it is about truth and what kind of world we citizens accept.

Sadly, we have many instance over and over in history which evil wins out, so this case is not anything new (although unprecedented in its own way).

Regardless of the final result of this debacle, we must as a people speak up. We must not forget the atrocities of history and work to prevent and ameliorate them, for if we don't, we can expect an even worse future since we didn't learn from the past.

This sucks beyond belief and with the Madeleine Mccann case I have come to see how so many people are willing to sell their soul for money. This author and his wife are nothing new, and I have to confess I really struggle at times to put myself in their shoes and work out how they can so behave (when it must be obvious to them that their book is nonsense).

I agree about the wider implications of this case. I think if one good thing can come of this debacle, it's that it might wake people up to the countless other cases where injustice has occured, where lies and cover-ups and outright deception has been propagated in the media. For me the Mccann case was a starting point which opened up my eyes to other cases, the rumours of injustice pertaining to which, I'd previously just considered to be conspiracy nonsense.

Moreover, the Mccann case has also been great as an indication of corruption, providing us with a who's who if you like of people who are dirty: Jim Gamble being a good example.

People who have already made their minds up about this case, I don't honestly think will become promccann after the book comes out. The only thing that will change my mind is if by some miracle she's found alive. I won't be reading it and I don't think others like us will

The book isn't aimed at people who have read the police files or Goncalo's book or my book. It is aimed at the masses who will eat it up. It is one more support for "the narrative," the one being promoted by the McCanns, the media, and Scotland Yard. It is propaganda and it works as it should as propaganda. The more propaganda you put out, the more successful you are at drowning the opposition. When this book comes out and gets major media attention (read: there will be important reviews of it), the book will shoot right up in the rankings on google so that when people google "madeleine," they won't find Goncalo's book or my book, they will find Summers book. And that is how propaganda wins. It simply overwhelms. True, there has been a heartwarming attempt by people like Hideho to put out a tremendous number of videos in order to get the message out (and they are fantastically done) but, still, Summers' book will get the stamp of approval and that is what people accept in the end. If you need any proof of that, just look at how many people are angry with me for saying Scotland Yard is running a faux investigation...why are they angry? Because Scotland Yard has that stamp of approval of being an organization one should trust and with Summers being an award winning writer (much like Pulitzer Prize winning author Stacy Schiff whose book on Cleopatra is far believed over mine in spite of my far superior research and providing of evidence), Summers's conclusions will be accepted (over the police detective on the case and a profiler)....and that is how power works.

I only started my own quest for the truth after reading "Madeleine", and you can't get more pro Mcann than that. I believe in reading as much as possible whether I agree with the premise of the book or not. There is often a small grain of truth which will merit further research. There are thankfully enough of us out there, and those with in depth knowledge who will be able to pick holes in its truthfulness, and keep this case in the spotlight, certainly in the blogosphere.

This sounds just the sort of book my sister would love to read. She had not done any research but believes what TV tells her. Whereas I have on and off looked into this case for over two years.

Kelly Siegler stated today on a different case "coincidences are circumstantial evidence". I am just hoping that Scotland Yard are waiting until they have got all their ducks in a row, so that they can make a court case stick without some clever lawyer picking it apart.

This sounds just the sort of book my sister would love to read. She had not done any research but believes what TV tells her. Whereas I have on and off looked into this case for over two years.

Kelly Siegler stated today on a different case "coincidences are circumstantial evidence". I am just hoping that Scotland Yard are waiting until they have got all their ducks in a row, so that they can make a court case stick without some clever lawyer picking it apart.

Scotland Yard is not investigating the McCanns. Redwood has said so a dozen times and all evidence supports they are looking only at the abduction theory (three years spent reviewing material that has nothing to do with the McCanns, digging in places that have nothing to do with the McCanns, making appeals for a stranger abductor....). Redwood has said the point of the review is closure, not justice, and I believe him. There is no where near enough evidence to take the McCanns to court and no prosecutor in his right mind would set foot in there. Without a body linking directly to the McCanns, Scotland Yard would be eviscerated if they arrested the McCanns; the outcry would be tremendous.

By fall, I think this case will be "closed" as is Scotland Yard's plan. Civil case ruled on, Summer's book out supporting the McCanns and Scotland Yard, and Scotland Yard administratively closing the case exonerating the McCanns and giving them "closure." Sad, but, I see no other possible outcome.

But surely Mr Andy Redwood must be aware of all strange things, things that don´t add up?? If he indeed does suspect the McCanns, but isn´t "allowed" to investigate them...?! How very frustrating.OR is this genuine from his point of view, and he actually believes he is conducting a proper job?

Do you really think it will sell well?Well.. mabye there are a lot who cant think for themself or question very well..After all.. she is reported missing and nothing was found.Such are the facts..So what is in the book then?Facts?A waste of money, this spin.People really continue to believe she will come back?I doubt it.

Facts and statistics are cold or boring.Like..abused and murdered children are by the hands of their own family statistics?The social service fails?Well..It seems the UK is doing well on crime.But news,crime and horror are most written or reported in English.And copy paste in Europe.Love the Europian news..The Mccann case never showed the Portugese version.

I read Enid blyton the famous five, loved it. and I saw Harry Potter.(Did not like it had to see it, more than once..)Children like it.No parents around, and be a big hero.But in reality..What kind of parent..would send their child to such adventures?

I dont think this book will be a bestseller.Google is still availible and free.I dont think she ever will be found, and I dont think the Mccann is or will be speaking the true, or will be charged.

I do think the Uk is not showing their good reputation.As tourist, as parents, as medical They seem to fail.Even this high profile SY skills or high recommended rented crimefighters and the money did Failed..

Not even could trace other related crimes,or preventing such.

So,if.. I bought that book I would be very depressed to see it was one big fail, or I would have some questions, and get very depressed.

The mccann did indeed made the children very aware.I think it is cold to do.They exposed the siblings to the media,and their search,and their claim.I think it is cold parenting.Freezing..

But Summers can't conclude, he hasn't access to evidence that we don't know of. Can he speculate upon a mysterious paedophile who, instead of sitting on British child's bed, for some reason extracted the McCann child from bed ?

Pat, To my knowledge Summers/Swan have also contacted Joana and Johanna (for "research" purposes). You might be able to check? These are very specific targets aren't they?I wonder if the book is a commissioned attempt to name and discredit the blogosphere.

*It is inconceivable to me that the any McCann family members would agree to interviews without prior (perhaps contracted) agreements about the direction taken. *

Joana has been contacted and didn't reply.Certainly no member of the McCann clan would accept an interview without being sure of the book's orientation.But, Pat, SY can by its own authority give some kind of closure only to its investigation and review, certainly not to the case. The AG will have to shelve the case again within a short time. Then SY could eventually apply some pressure.

Ah, Anne, it isn't about what Scotland Yard COULD do, it is about what they WILL do. And they will close this case with an unprosecuted stranger abductor.

What I have learned through 20 years in this business, is that the police are happy to do the right thing if they can, if they have the ability, the evidence, and the stuff for good prosecution. They will do what is right if it isn't political suicide. But, when these elements are not in place, they will do what is politically expedient.

Let's look at the simple issues:

1) They don't have a body or enough solid evidence to prosecute the McCanns successfully.

2) They certainly don't have enough evidence to prevent a massive outcry from people who believe the McCanns are innocent (and that is the larger group).

3). There has always been something political behind this case and that hasn't changed.

4) The entire Scotland Yard investigation is a defense lawyer's dream; he would crush any prosecutor's case in court because he could point out that Scotland Yard spent three years and millions looking for an abductor which they wouldn't do if evidence pointed to the McCanns

5) Fake creche Dad would prove the police fabricated evidence.

6). NOTHING Scotland Yard has done remotely resembles an investigation of the McCanns.

7) Police investigations do not eliminate every other nonevidence based lead in the universe in order to prove that the original evidence has validity.

It is patently ridiculous to think that Scotland Yard is planning a big coup to go after the McCanns. Portugal still could do something but I seriously doubt it.

We are in the end of this game and the McCanns will win. Sometimes it is what it is.

Surely this is an opportunity to challenge an accout - an opportunity to present the truth? What is the link between the McCanns and this author? If it can be proved that they comissioned this book and if their version can be challenged then it will be possible to use it to gain attention on its back?

Effectively this author is undermining all of his previous works by doing this. Any intelligent person who might have been convinced by earlier works into Kennedy and Nixon will now be thrown into doubt.

Still.. Portugal is not part of the British Empire.http://duke-nidhoggr.deviantart.com/art/British-Empire-map-436209642(Not like eating in your backyard)So I never understood why the UK had the need to made this missing girl so high profile.She is not the only missing person in the world.

They still do.So..

Even IF they found the abducter,and he is real, even if it can be proved she is murderded.Hard evidence, like murdered her on cctv footage.IF..

It is not like in the USA (old sparky)Probaly the killer dont face the court, after such a long time.I dont know how the law works, but it different in each country.The trail will go on for many years.

Probaly the murderer can get rich to sell the story.So..I can not think of 1 good thing came out,in this case.Or will come out.The UK reputation? (!)Justice? (!) Better Protection standards? (!)Less childabuse or preventing? (!)

Still.. even in Europe children die or get abused, or live on the streets.In Germany 25% of the homeless are not 18 yet.

So still many children,on the streets,not protected,or take care very well. with a high risk to dissapear, or get abused, or worse.They have problems, or are problems.The Mccann never mention them.Kate in her new job, should know Those are probaly not so innocent or beautifull.Or little anymore.

So only statistic.Pretent what will happen, if..The abducter is real and true, and found, and it all can be proven..(Well he did not claim any ransome)He could made a lot of money then every time he opens his mouth.My opinion..That is how the media works.

Even if Madeleine returned home..The Media also would camping in their backyard..The papers would sell well.

Even when the Mccann was right about everyting (I dont believe)They still have to face a lot of problems then..It is not like 'she was never gone', like K&G like to believe so.

I dont know if the Mccanns are protected, they manage to say or claim unusual things ang get away with it.You think someone should prevent them from such unusual behaviour.I never understand the need for the media or their sympathie in this search.

The UK make a bigfool of theirself..I really do think so.But I do not understand why they did.

"Esteemed investigative author" says that theories of parental involvement are 'unfounded' when legally nothing of the sort has been established, and when he himself cannot possibly know the nature of all such theories.

"Esteemed investigative author" has mystical insight that allows him to know all unknowns.

"Esteemed investigative author" clearly fails to appraise the McCanns of how Amaral's theories can be proven to be without foundation.

"Esteemed investigative author" can 'demonstrate' that lines possibly still being pursued by two active police investigations are unfounded.

whitewash; whitewash; whitewash.All designed to prove that everything possible was done to find the 'bad man' who took madeline from her bed and - ultimately found nothing. Nothing at all. makes it look as almost as if madeline never existed.The parents faces are looking haggard more and more every day and it's nothing to do with Amaral or Scotland yard "investigating" the disappearance of their child. Worry about what someone might one day find or say could be to blame?

Who commissioned the book?My money is on one of the McCanns wealthy backers (if not Team McCann). Imo that can be the only reason the McCanns or their extended families agreed to speak to Summers a Swann. They were 100% safe in knowledge that the authors remit was to follow the party line, abduction.

I was one of those with a naive faith in Anthony Summers. It's interesting that since his marriage and professional collaboration with Robyn Swann his books now take the form of debunking so-called conspiracy theories. A quick look at her background could lead to a conclusion as to why this might be.

The mere fact of his involvement however is a red flag that this is a political case. Summers' area of concern has always been high level political intrigue. The difference this time is that he appears to be writing in the interests of the politicians rather than on the side of exposing the truth.

Nothing yet apart from their own pronouncements has ruled out the McCanns' involvement in the disappearance of their daughter, and there is so much does proclaim their guilt. It's amazing that a so-called investigative journalist could overlook this.

I hope the book doesn't have the impact intended. There can't be many of Summers' previous readers who will be impressed with basically being told "You're not seeing, what you're seeing". Most people who suspect the McCanns came to our conclusions directly from watching them and their behaviour, not reading propaganda either pro, or against. It's going to take more than a "definitive account" to change that perception.

Anon @7.54That is an excellent summary I think. It looks like a case of 'poachers turned gamekeepers'.If Summers/Swan can provide compelling evidence that answers all doubts about the McCanns, then well and good. But events in Lisbon make it starkly obvious that this cannot be the case: under the scrutiny of a court hearing Amaral's findings look firmer than ever (the issue of damages aside).What I find very disturbing is the contacts made with bloggers. It betrays an agenda which has nothing to do with establishing a firm sequence of events (such as might exonerate the McCanns), and everything to do with an attack upon those who doubt the veracity of an 'official' version of abduction. Without abduction, there can only be one conclusion. So we await evidence of abduction, and this from authors who have no access to the crime scene, no powers of arrest and no rights to interview.Abduction is the one scenario that is still truly unfounded.

My opinion is that the book will be seen for what it is ....propaganda...and good on that couple putting their names to it.

A simple point that is getting missed...MOST people have never got past the neglect aspect, they are horrified that Parents could leave such young children EVERY night on their own in a foreign country whilst out enjoying themselves.

People in huge numbers KNOW this case is skewed and the truth withheld....they also know they are protected and that any other parents would have been demonised.

Sometimes in life evil looks as though it is prevailing ...the reason in part is due to the tolerance of good, but this case is far from over.

All these people that have deliberately obfuscated will be exposed - things are changing in the world and they are on the losing side - be sure of that.

Everyone can see the BS that has been played out and all to cover up the death of a innocent 3 year old child named Madeleine.

The fight must continue until Truth and Justice prevails.

Where there is a WILL ..there IS a way.

It does not stop at this latest court action ...most can see this is all theatre.

@ I think the maccanns cannot avoid the inevitable problems they face?It was a very foolish mistake to write her own book prematurely before a case could be resolved?The threat in her own book about amaral, maybe the ruin of their case in its intentions to harm and damage amaral in spite?This was done not via a solicitors letter to amaral, before her book was published?So kate manipulated the british public and press, without sending a legal writ to amaral, to address any personal actions about his book?It is the british public who have not obtained the book by amaral, who have been isolated from buying his book?Banned in the uk, since no press paper will touch it for libel reasons of being carter rucked?Demonstrates a huge contradiction to the files available on line?The book isnt libel, since it wasnt published in the uk, it simply gave evidence in relation to what is still odd about this case, it raised many questions about events, there is still questions to why a book should be banned that was simply concerned about events that didnt add up?There isnt no evidence of a abduction in seven years, what is amaral supposed to think at this later stage in time?He has every right to sue the maccanns on a false theory that has not been proven with concrete proof?There was no proof of life to start with, so how did the maccanns manage to manipulate such a false idea?And why didnt their pr team secure such evidence before wasting money?No ransom, no collection on reward says it all.Carnt change the facts, no matter how much spin is used.

Dogs can find missing people after 26 years.Robert Leur was missing for 26 years and found this week in his car in the river.( Maas)They manage to find the remains of the car and this man.The cause of dead is probaly suicide,no crime.So.. the dogs even can find a dead person in the river after 26 years.( you wonder what is remaing after such a long time)It is great work, and it gives you hope, the Police was still working on cold cases.(no media show invited to picture this search)(Lowprofile)I hope in this book they also will tell how we can trust our snifferdogs.How many people still alive or dead is found by those dogs.Those are facts..In the Mccanncase there is no true or justice served.I dont think she will ever be found, not by accident or good qualtily policework try to solve an old case.

So reading they manage to find and (try to find) a man in the river after 26 years..Well..it did not hit the headlines very much, but it is great they did such a good job.Amazing even..

So it was the dogs again..Who did find this man in the water..Hope such facts are to be proven and mentioned in that book.(Probaly you can not even trust the dogs from the UK)Gerry don´t.

So I hope this book is 'boring' with cold facts and hard statistics on childcare.But mabye then..even then? forbidden by the Mccann and getting a CR gag.

Just amazing how the dogs did find the man.Just amazing how they still searched for this man.No media war needed or famous person missing..A very good job done..How it should be.Missing persons found by dogs..It gives you hope, doen`t it?

An interesting theory is whether a publisher with some guts ( and money to boot ) would take that role on.

For example a National newspaper that was sued in the past?

The trial in Portugal as Mr Amaral has said is not libel or as I thought Defamation. It seems to be damage to the person(s) wellbeing not reputation.

It would be an interesting experiment in an attempt to get at the truth if a libel case was brought due to the publishing of Mr Amaral's book in the UK.

It would also be interesting if mr Amaral sued for libel specifically in the UK too.

Because libel cases are adversarial ( Defence V Prosecution ) you have to at least appear before a Judge and swear on oath on pain of jail for perjury.

This is exactly the reason why highly paid lawyers are highly paid I think.

Despite the huff and puff for seven years no-one but no -one who has been involved in this case has ever turned up before a Judge or a Jury. I suspect that this is intentional.

WhY? Simply because a libel case brought in the UK is utterly fraught with danger. The danger being that libel in the UK involves defending your reputation by means of proving that what the libeller is saying is totally untrue.

Two cases backfired in this respect. Jeffrey Archer and Jonathon Aitken. They told deliberate lies in front of a Judge and were jailed for not telling the truth in Court.

This is a very good reason for avoiding bringing libel cases in the UK.

Because in order to prove that the libeller is lying and defaming you, you have to tell the truth - the whole truth and nothing but the truth in the Court.

It would be similar to laying the whole Madeleine investigation in front of the British Public. Readers and viewers of television expect the media to strtch the truth or lie but they don't expect lies to be told in Court without sanction if you do.

If some publisher had the guts then maybe we ( and the public ) might get a little closer to the truth the whole truth etc through the processes of the Court. Nothing I have seen suggests anything which may harm the public interest.

To be fair it would take great courage ( which Mr Amaral has ) and a lot of money (which Mr Amaral has not got for now) to do it but as a counter to the 'Esteemed ' new book re: Madeleine it would be great if he could find a top lawyer in the UK to do a No Win No Fee representation on his behalf.

It will be interesting to see if the new book libels Mr Amaral and the PJ and possibly the Portuguese Justice System. I suspect they will conveniently forget the assistance of The Leicester police and other British police agencies being involved in the compiling of evidence in the whole investigation alongside the PJ.

As I say Mr Amaral's book has never been banned because it has never appeared in print in the UK.You can't ban something from the British public that hasn't been published yet. Later maybe? That would involve a trial and reasons would need to be given to a Judge or Judges. Publicly.

@ Another problem that might crop up later, that has baffled me alot about this case, was kate in that apartment on the last check?Going by gerrys statement he saw madeleine on his check, view from the inside of the apartment and madeleine being nearest to the door?Where was kate exactly in her view?If kate saw the twins first, not madeleine?Can this suggest the view was from out side with madeleine being the furthest away from the twins, looking through a opend window?How did kate make the distinction the out side shutters had been damaged from a inside view?This mistake by kate herself puts her out side in any reconstruction?Kates version is odd in her view, and how she knew alot about a open window and not seeing madeleine in the dark?Even with a window open kate would of seen the bed was empty from the view gerry stated being nearest to the door?Then there is the real problem the bed looked like it was never slept in on that night, or ruffled covers to show kate had searched that bed in the dark?It becomes obvious kate left no traces of her alleged search, because she was not in that apartment to check on the twins to secure their safety, because she was too busy creating her abductor story to notice the flaws in her lies about her missing child?Further evidence to prove this has been a lie, kate states they have taken her daughter?Think about this carefully, why would kate listen to jane tanner who only saw one person?If kate was convinced it was more than one?Thats a contradiction straight away, and also gerry didnt see this abductor or jane at all?So why did kate go along with janes version, in contradiction to what gerry stated?How odd kate did not beleive her husband in what he stated?Kate wasnt with jane tanner in this odd story?There is the main question why kate hasnt picked up on what gerry stated?So if kate beleives it was a stranger?Why didnt she allow all the group to be eliminated from being suspect, if she wasnt the instigator of a lie about a abductor on her check, and why would anyone have to through this manipulator to find out what happend, when the group could provide exactly where they was, avoided on the orphra show, and in other tv show spots, giving no back ground to that holiday at all?If it was true the maccanns never declined to take part in any reconstruction with the group?Then i think amaral should ask the question why the group never appears on tv with them in that contradiction?

"Award-winning authors Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan have produced the first independent, objective account of the case. They have examined the released Portuguese files, conducted in-depth interviews and original research to answer the questions" says the publisher's blurb on Amazon. It would seem sensible to reserve judgement until it's published.

Apparently you do not understand profiling. I have been contacted by Mr. Summers and his behaviors and evasive statements lead me to conclude that he is writing a pro-McCann book. He DID NOT do in-depth interviews because he DID NOT interview Dr. Amaral and he did NOT do an in-depth interview with me. It is written in the blurb that he and his wife found speculation that the McCanns were involved in Maddie's death to be unfounded, so it is clear to me he did not understand the evidence.

As a profiler, it is my profession to analyze evidence and make a judgment as to what that evidence means PRIOR to the conclusion of a police case or other outcome.

How can someone claim to write an objective account of what happened if he did not interview the original lead coordinator of the case Mr. Amaral? For an author to include quotes from someone's blog, that author must deem that person's opinions to be relevant or be considered as relevant by many others, so why didn't Mr. Summers interview Pat?

There is not enough evidence to successfully prosecute the parents however there is no evidence that eliminates them as suspects, none. I suspect Mr. Summers knows that, but according to his critics the facts never stopped him from writing a good story.

The person most directly involved with errr..."Looking for Madeleine" would be the lead PJ coordinator : the man who organised the search.

If Summers/Swan believe their book to be the first "independent" account of events,then they must believe that the work undertaken by the PJ/SY in 2007 was somehow LACKING independence. Have Summers/Swan got some elaborate conspiracy theory up their sleeve?

Pity the McCanns have never been able to establish such a point when pursuing their vendetta against Amaral.

....thinking a little further. I'll be interested to see how Summers/Swan establish the fact that the initial investigation (and ensuing files) lack the appropriate objectivity and independence that they can supply.

Perhaps Amaral and Pat are part of a wider agenda involving major media outlets and political interventions that are trying to frame the McCanns. My god, who would be funding such a venture? The Vatican? Murdoch?

I guess we'll have to wait and see.

It is only a pity that it seems to have never crossed Summers' mind to actually interview Amaral himself. Amaral must know who is REALLY behind the initial decisions to do away with police independence and forensic objectivity.

I wonder what the Mcannteam and the UK team did in those years.Searching the internet for childporn?Looking at photos taken from holidaymakers in the Algarve?Checking cellphones?In that month/year?I mean..well..They did not find anything..

It seems they have to admit Amaral did a good job.No reward was claimed, no ransom was demanded.( I probaly would sell my ex, if it fits, to get the money)No prove of any abducter.

So.. Kate does have a new job at missing people..But she don´t even protect the siblings from the media.Even expose them.

The UK seems to have only one person missing.Or only 'care' about one missing person.

I dont know if this book will have real facts, but I dont think they will publish a book what can't be sold(C_R)It is really stupid the SY said they were about making arrest last year.The they started the dig, and now they found hairs after 7 year.Mabye the UKpublic will buy it.I hope the UK public is clever to know the story doesn`t fit.The papers in the UK love to produce horrible story`s.They have no shame about publishing it.More speculation, than true facts.I do hate Europe does copy that.

David Beckham, JK rowling and many more famous did, or do support the Mccann.Why the `need´ to convince or reach for the public/politic/sport/religion opinion?They really want (need) the public on their site..To support them.If not.. Gag them.Freedom of speak.Or Justice..

In 7 years this whole thing did not help or protect any child.( TB Madeleines law is a good basic right)I think this case did bring more harm.Karen M or Mikaeel.All this money spend..they better could use it for better social workers,good teachers, or foodsupply for the poor children at school.It makes me sick to see, it is all about EGO, MONEY, and STATUS.

So the dogs can even find dead people after years missing.Missing people should support those dogs..In every way..Spend money on them, because they are worth every penny.Mabye someone could write a book about snifferdogs?

@ They could write a hundred pro mCcann books, heart warming,question freindly, comfortable solutions with a nice layer soap, depending which gallery of information swan finds interesting, but still people havent managed to gain a english copy of amarals book?It cannot be independent, since it will be scrutanised by the mCcanns, and how much of any truth will it state?Will it take on board the contradictions in many statements?Or will this be another book by kate and freinds?They havent interviewd anyone so far in relation to this book, will there be any research notes for the books direction, or will this be a tabloid book?

Any decent police investigator would have to look at the parents in the case of a very young child who has gone missing, especially when there is no evidence to point to anyone else being involved, so why Summers and Swan, see fit to make this claim (from the book blurb on Amazon):

"Speculation that the McCanns played a role in their daughter's fate, the authors demonstrate, is unfounded."

is anybody's guess. It will be interesting to see the mental contortions they use to try and remove Kate and Gerry from the frame - for that reason alone it might be worth reading their book. Scotland Yard has attempted the same by producing a litany of dodgy characters for the public to ooh and aah at, but nothing has stuck so far. Patsies who were in the wrong place at the wrong time doing the wrong thing must be in short supply.

I think the best we can hope for from the book is perhaps an insight into what is going on in the minds of the people protecting the McCanns and maybe some hint of their agenda.

Let's be fair! What would one expect a professional writer to do? Write a book to be carter-rucked or write a book for "mega bucks"?

Everyone knows by now - writers and media alike - that they are not allowed to say anything against the McCanns' "official version of events" or else! That is a crime of "lésé majesté"!

That said, how do we know Burson-Marsteller - the global PR firm directed by Clarence Mitchell - the McCanns reputation manager - is not behind the book?

Notice how Scotland Yard went silent as soon as the McCanns' vs Amaral "mega bucks" trial went into standby mode. There will be no "new developments" and on-site mock searches at least until a new date for the trial is set...sorry! I digress!

For all we know, Scotland Yard may have fallen under the spell of Clarence Mitchell via his mentor at the Conservative Party - the actual British PM. It's a small island. A small world.

That said, I will not be buying this book but I am waiting to read the definitive work on the case written by you and Amaral - as promised.

I read about the Maddie look alikes..Some people really wanted to rip the girl from their parents.She was seen all over the world.

I think it is creepy.But it can give a pedo a reason 'to explain' they 'made a mistake' and really did not mean to harm by ripping them away from their parents.But many children were aware then..Did not sleep well.

In the JH site there was a very good avatar.I don`t see it anymore.

Madeleine was a pretty girl.The Official Facebook comments are all the same.How can anyone do this to SUCH A BEAUTIFULL LITTLE girl..So if she was ugly it was ok then?*sarcasm*And I will think of you, pray and cry every day.*Many children are abducted*Yes.. there are international rules.Haags verdrag kinderontvoering.So as an ambassador..She should know about abduction in general, statitsics.Most family and take a lot of years to get them back legal.C_R must have now it.

So back to reality.Loverboys they call the new pimps.I am sure they at least did search the local pimps.

Kate should go to Bahnhof Zoo.Look around for at least a day.But in the UK there are places to.Instead visiting the Hilton hotel.*But then.. the Hilton Hotel in Berlin is famous.. because Michael Jackson had his balconscene..*Rip Michael, but..Also a moneymaker..f***** up little child.Or visit 'our boarding' schools in Europe.( more a prison than high education Young criminals these days)Lady Di would..I think..

In the name of charity.In the name of Justice.In the name of PREVENT..Gerry said the abducter probaly strikes again?Because??Why the NEED to say such things?

The mccanns are real bad Uk ambassadors.Cold parenting, medics I don`t trust, and even the SY and the Media tell porkies.Well..The UK history..Interesting anyway.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNu8XDBSn10Bring ones to 'justice' who never met their oldest dsughter.

@ this case is certainly bizzare, and im sure there is plenty for pat to write about in any future book, it does seem there is another law suit against a news paper via the mCcanns?Spies, and bent private investigators, recommended via pr?Odd conflicts over e fits, but one thing is for sure, not one law suit over the changed information the mCcanns gave in their stories?Those critics that now stand in such hypocracy and groomed by the mCcann machine, didnt see how they were being played in this farce?Designed out of corruption which sy used in their investigation the law suit e fit?So the question remains their pr team are just as corrupt, and sy should ask questions over these law suits blocking their investigations, into sightings?Going a little further i can now understand why the portugal police didnt want to touch this case in its corrupted state?Leaving sy to look stupid over a law suit e fit the mCcanns threatend to sue over, if divulged?Kate contradicts this law suit in her own book in the credability she relied on in those that are corrupt, not them qualified in any real search?Which comes back to amarals question about evidence of damages being real at all?Was this a set up to create the impression of damages that dont exist?Along with a false abductor that also dosent exist?Has the fighting fund gone too far, its now damaging its own purpose in finding any truth at all?If kate understood the letter sent by amarals ex wife, she might of seen the point before the penny dropped about this case?The only way the press can stop law suits, is to drop the story altogether?Thats the only solution left to stop this farce.Thats been the plan from the start, its never been about a real search?

Any news? Everything seems to be quiet from SY and the McCanns have been silent at every turn. Now maybe I am too cynical but if you are truly (truly) looking for a child you don't have lengthy spells of doing nothing? This all seems to be centred round making the parents look innocent in the eyes of the British law at least....My thoughts are that the parents know something ... their every action and comment indicates something is not as they would like us to believe. The public are not fools nor should we be treated as such.

In which Mr Summers, and Tom Mangold (both ex BBC), tried to argue that the Romanovs did not all die at Ekaterinburg, but became "pawns in an international power game".

One Amazon reviewer has Summers nailed: "A book for the real crazies.... stressing minor inconsistencies and inaccuracies, whilst ignoring or dismissing strong factual evidence. In fact it provides a case study for the type of conspiratorial history so well outlined in David Aaronovich's "Voodoo Histories"."

@ Dr robert martin makes a very interesting point about the patio shutters, not mentioned in statements, or the alleged two versions gerry gave to the police which door he used?Concerns about a abduction, and problems faced about the shutters dropping to the floor, and a mystery about a open window?Since madeleine didnt go missing on previous nights in the beleif the apartment was locked and secure enough while they dined out, prompts a odd question about a baby sitter?And the odd checks about a locked apartment?Depending which version gerry gave as truth?In a state of a locked apartment, it will be the key holders up for question, it also needs to be explained to the mccanns, the vast problems any alleged abductor would have in removing a child from a secured apartment?No disrespect intended, this isnt a clear cut case of anyone else being involved, and are they all lying?Its important to consider a reconstruction when things dont add up?

He is definitely what is called Anti- Establishment and what some would call a Conspiracy theorist.

I don't agree with the tags as he usually puts his points across cerdibly and sincerely.

He is rightly suspicious of the Powers that Be.

But similar to the accusations levelled against Pat Brown on other sites in relation to Mr Amaral as well as Tony Bennett ( if you know of him) then these are people with a fixed line of thinking and Team McCann use the same derogatory implications to further their agenda coming to a similar conclusion but via different route. That is that Mr Amaral should be careful as to who is friends are.

It is a shame that these criticims exist because the only way to find Madeleine is to try and find the Truth of what actually happened and not be deflected in that finding by sniping at theories you don't agree with.

The latest being SY - Great job or lousy job?

No doubt Richard D Hall will attract his critics Pro and Anti but he is a good journalist and checks his facts.

He may be into Flying Saucers ( I'd love to see one myself - if they exist?) but that doesn't automatically make him into a ' Conspiracy Nutter' so if you watch his videos keep your mind open.

I would love to say the same for the SY Investigation but sdaly I can't

I think they are more concerned with finding suspects than finding Madeleine. But if they come up with the results i will be first on any website to heap praise upon them for a job well done.

How clever of you in warning us that this gentleman is considered by some to be a conspiracy theorist but to nevertheless to keep an open mind if we decide to watch his videos. What you are essentially doing is instilling doubt in people's minds as to the author's credibility, possibly even convincing some not to bother to watch.

Yesterday, I watched Part 1, a sample of Part 2, and the totality of Part 3 and Part 4, no claims of UFOs here, just basically relating to people what many of us, who have followed the case, already know:

That there are inconsistencies in the McCann's and their friends' account of events.

That the McCanns changed their story.

That some of their friends changed their stories.

That the McCanns have employed con artists, crooks, people with in depth knowledge of money laundering.

That their fund is not a charity, that it is far from transparent; and that it has been used to pay the fees of their elite lawyers.

That the British media for the most part prints what the couple wants.

That Mr. Mitchell and his team of crooks are responsible for the majority of the farfetched stories that have been disseminated in the media these past seven years.

And that the British government for some inexplicable reason has been heavily involved in this case since day one.

No news here, perhaps it will be a revelation for those who take as gospel what they read in papers such as the Sun and the Daily Mail or what they see on shows such as Nancy Grace and Jane Velez Mitchell.

Good post there 'guerra',agree also with Pat and Mr.Hall,..But on that other well covered up subject please read this, ~~~ UK national hero Lord Hill Norton had this to say on this subject,.."Since my name has become connected with UFO matters in quite a big way in this country, and in one or two other countries too, I have frequently been asked why a person of my background — a former Chief of the Defense Staff, a former Chairman of the NATO Military Committee — why I think there is a cover-up, or what the reasons may be for government’s wishing to cover up the facts about UFOs. A number of explanations have often been put forward. The most frequent, and perhaps the most plausible, is the government’s concern (which [is] primarily that of the United States, and that of my own country) over the public’s reaction if they [were] told the truth — which is that there are objects in our atmosphere which are technically miles in advance of anything that we can deploy, that we have no means of stopping them coming here, and that we have no defense against them, should they be hostile" Sorry to go off topic,couldn't resist.Thanks for all your hard work,.. All the Best!

@ The other interesting thing about dr david paynes visit, madeleine did not go to the door if she recognised him?Madeleine did not call her mother either if she was there?Did kate forget dr david payne is close to her children, so why would he have to knock if madeleine can talk and shout?Dosent make sense at all, a flaky story by both.

Hi Pat, Do you think that it's possible that whatever happened to Maddie happened earlier than the evening we are all assuming? ie - could whatever happened to her have happened the day before, giving them 24 hours or more to concoct their story? Maddie's name was found on the creche register the day she 'disapeared' but that doesn't mean anything, anybody could have put her name there, has the handwriting been checked? Has it been verified she was around on this day? Photos were deleted from the camera so that 'last' picture has no proof it was that actual day.

In terms of hiding a body, Gerry and Robert Murat's mobiles both pinged within minutes of each other at a golf course. Golf courses are easily accessible by car, and have acres of rough yards from the fairway's, the ones near the sea have soft, marsh type soil, many also have large bodies of inland lakes, and they also have rakes in all the bunkers, and green keepers sheds will also have other gardening type tools, such as spades etc.. probably not locked.

Might sound far fetched but If you think about it, a golf course would be a good/easy place to hide a body.

David Payne is involved in some capacity, and so is Robert Murat (he may not know how he is involved but he must be as they phones pinged at the same place)

And finally, there is some cover up from the very top of the British Government to cover this sad fiasco up, get to the bottom of that, and you might crack this case, but I suspect child abuse and/or paedophile rings are involved in some capacity.

Good luck in your quest, the whole thing sickens me to the pit of my stomach.

Careful, otherwise you are falling in the trap of what the MSM people ( like David AAronovich ) want people to think. Conspiracy Theorist equals nutter.

I said:" He is definitely what is called Anti- Establishment and what some would call a Conspiracy theorist."

I don't call him that but you have added your own Conspiracy theory into the mix as if I want people not to watch the DVD.

All round it is an excellent portrayal of what has occured.Some things I wouldn't agree with most things I do.

Read again what I say about Pat Brown and Tony Bennett then read blacksmiths last but one post about how GM spent 1/5th of his impact statement time referring to Tony Bennett and the alleged connection between himself and Mr Amaral in front of the Judge.

To try and prove their own Conspiracy theory that Tony Bennett is a Conspiracy theorist and by association therefore Mr Amaral is too.It is done to discredit valid criticism or opinion from a whole book to a pamphlet.

Join Our Mailing List!

Twitter

By Pat Brown

"Killing for Sport is the most valuable insight into the minds of serial killers that you will ever read. While other profilers tend to conceal the clear facts behind complex technical language and psychobabble. Pat Brown actually tells it like it is."